You are saying that the someone leaving money in their company's bank account would filter down to the general population.
In general terms, yes. In a competitive market, each competitor will pursue what it perceives to be it's best interest. A good R&D manager will pursue a bigger budget to innovate. A good Marketing manager will pursue better marketing strategies, a good maintenance man will hope to give the shop a lick of paint, with a bit of overtime thrown in.
All possible, by virtue of extra capital available in a well run company. Conversely, other a good Financial controller will seek to minimize budgets. It's all competitive, and a good General manager will live or die by decisions to invest while the money is there or to row back.
I only referred to socialism as socialists are generally against the idea of trickle down economics. Do you agree with trickle down economics then?
In general I do. But I can understand why socialists are against it. That is because what is euphemistically referred to as trickle down is actually quite the opposite. It's trickle up economics.
Hence the centralization of a wholly disproportionate amount of wealth into the hands of very few. If you want to call that trickle down, fair enough, I am opposed to it. I call it, trickle-up economics.
According to the Neri Institute only 12% of people earn more than 100k. It is not inconceivable then that that 100k could be the limit as it would not affect 88% of the population.
It is not inconceivable, are you proposing that? I am not.
is this bourne out of plain old begrudgery?
Not really, if I was begrudging, I'd set the limit a lot lower. But as stated, €2m was a ball park figure. It can go higher if need be.
But it could also stifle real growth and development.
Our current economic system can stifle real growth and development too.
If an income limit is showing to be the cause of stifling real growth. Raise the limit.
For arguments sake, between two sectors of the population, which do think will generate the most significant growth.
The 99.985% of population earning less than €2m a year, or the 0.015% earning more than€2m?
The NFL is privately owned via franchises. They have self-imposed those limits.
So what? I'm all for voluntary imposed limits. But in the absence of voluntary limits, legislation would be required.
I think that's a cop-out to be fair. Based on what you do know, what country would most resemble the policy?
Oh, ok, I will go with Sweden. How about you?